Maine Voters Reject Rights Referendum : Election: Measure sought to bar new protection of people not covered by state law. Opponents said the proposal was anti-gay.

After months of acrimonious debate, voters Tuesday narrowly rejected a proposal that had been widely viewed as the latest national skirmish on whether homosexuals should have specific legal protection from discrimination.

The statewide referendum would have blocked new laws and repealed existing local ordinances that extend civil rights protection to people not already covered by Maine’s Human Rights Act, which bars discrimination based on race, color, sex, physical or mental disability, religion, age, ancestry, national origin, familial status and marital status.

No mention was made in the referendum of sexual orientation, but opponents contended that the measure’s intent was to turn back efforts to include gay men and lesbians among the groups whose rights are protected by law. For instance, passage of the measure would have removed such protection already on the books in Portland, Maine’s biggest city with 65,000 people.

With more than three-quarters of the vote counted late Tuesday, the measure was going down to defeat, 52%-48%.

Titled Question One on the ballot, the issue became the primary topic of political discussion in Maine coffee shops and on talk radio as the election approached.

People on either side of the referendum said that this New England state was the latest front in a continuing national battle over gay rights that has been waged in Oregon, Iowa and Colorado.

A group called Concerned Maine Families gathered 67,000 voter signatures to put the initiative on a ballot that included seven other measures, including bond issues and a law to require the use of seat belts.

Question One’s authors specifically avoided mention of homosexuality in the two-paragraph measure, in part to avoid the sort of constitutional challenges that disabled Colorado’s 1992 anti-gay rights bill, said Clifford Tinkham, spokesman for Concerned Maine Families.

If a legal challenge were to arise, Tinkham said: “We expect that the U.S. Supreme Court is better equipped to handle a question concerning civil rights than it is a question of morality.”

Despite its simple language, the measure was widely criticized as confusing, since voting “Yes” meant saying “no” to specific protection for gays. A cartoon in the Bangor Daily News, for instance, depicted a self-assured voter proclaiming: “I’m voting to require gays to wear seat belts.”

The measure’s opponents, including the group Maine Won’t Discriminate, raised about $1 million in contributions, much of it from gay rights and civil rights groups outside Maine.

Supporters of the cause, including Concerned Maine Families, reported only one-tenth of that amount in contributions. But their efforts were bolstered by the help of social conservative groups, including Concerned Women for America and the Family Research Council.

Both sides played to the crowds at last Saturday’s GOP straw poll in Bangor.

Paul Madore, who heads the Coalition to End Special Rights, urged passersby to view support of Question One as a stand against “conferring minority status on specific groups that don’t merit protection.”

The official protection of gays and lesbians, he said, soon would lead to affirmative action for that group, making it difficult for employers or landlords to deal with them as they would unprotected individuals.

A few feet away was the Rev. Robert H. Bonthius, a retired Presbyterian pastor who was trying to drum up opposition. “You have to recognize that there is a fundamental religious war going on,” Bonthius said. “I think it’s high time for Christians to stand up against the so-called Christian right, which is neither.”

The debate could be heard in less overtly political settings as well.

One of the state’s most prominent residents, horror novelist Stephen King, made his views clear to anyone passing his mansion in Bangor. On a long wrought-iron fence adorned with gargoyles and spider webs were dozens of green and white posters reading: “No On One--Maine Won’t Discriminate.”

Cab driver David Chase, driving a visitor past the King place last weekend, took the opposite view: “I don’t have special rights,” said Chase, a burly man with a Paul Bunyan beard and flannel hat. “Why should gays?”

At the Maine Won’t Discriminate offices on Maine, office director Alanna Cotch rejected the idea that the measure was about anything more than basic protection for gays--a group she said is routinely subjected to discrimination.

Passage of the measure, she predicted, would have had repercussions beyond Maine. “People are talking about this on Christian radio all across the country,” she said.